Carlos Monzon .Vs. Marvin Hagler

The 'Mass' version of the middleweight title, eh.

Wasn't that the fight where he was taken to school by Mike Colbert for 11 rounds? And we all know how brilliant Colbert was. :nut

 

I own the Benvenuti, Griffith, Valdez fights. I have seen some of his other fights. Which ones have you seen?

 

It was the fight where Hagler broke Colbert's jaw and knocked him out. As Hagler put it, "A man has to run out of gas sometime." I don't characterize running as boxing. Monzon didn't run.

 

Neither did Monroe in their first meeting- and he won virtually every round against Marv. Of course, Hagler won the rematches, but they both took place after Monroe was iced by Love- and the second fight was very close too.

 

Monzon lost some early fights, too. More than Hagler, in fact. We are talking about where they were at the time. Hagler dominated Colbert through the early rounds because all Colbert did was run. Colbert had some good middle rounds, but Hagler was setting the trap. Hagler was all over Colbert in the 11th and it was only a matter of time from that point. Hagler iced him with a single right hook. Colbert was undefeated and the number one contender. The fight was scheduled for 15, so even if Hagler hadn't knocked him out, he was on track to win a convincing points victory. The Colbert fight argues against your point.

 

It doesn't. Most ringsiders had Colbert ahead. For example, Jack Obermeyer had it 7-4 Colbert, Eddie Cool of Boxing News had an even bigger gap of 8-3. Colbert was number one contender in Ring magazine only (the year of the phoney ratings scam). He was rated about 7th in Boxing News.

Also, the Monzon early losses point is mute. We're talking 1977.

 

It sounds like you're really biased towards Hagler.

 

I'm a big fan of both fighters. It's just that Hagler was better and had a more impressive reign. Prime Hagler was too much for prime Monzon to handle. The 1977 version of both fighters makes Monzon's prospects even less.

 

It appears to be you that is lacking in objectivity here- as someone just noted.

 

Hagler's opposition was better, that's why his reign was more impressive. I am never impressed when a fighter blows through inferior opposition. Monzon should have looked better than he did given his opposition.

Like I said, I am big fan of Monzon, but people overestimate his greatness because of the length of his title reign and the number of title defenses. He's top five, but he's not top three. Hagler, Robinson, and Jones were better.

 

Monzon did not face or beat one fighter equal to Hearns. Not one. Those guys you just rattled off would have been DESTROYED by the Hitman.

 

Not at Middleweight, although I see Hearns beating Benvenuti at 154lbs, at Middle, Nino wins. Griffith does the Hitman at 147, and it is pick-em at 160.

Tommy was never quite the same fighter once he went above 154 IMO.

 

He wasn't the same but he still had great power. Besides, Nino is one of the most overrated and pampered MW's ever. Tommy was a towering freak, and would have knocked him stone ****ing cold.

 

I only saw proper Hearns power once above 154 (Vs Schuler) and Benvenuti was at least a couple of levels above James Schuler.

Tommy's legs were never quite right post 1984, I take prime 160lbs Benvenuti to use that to his advantage on the way to late stoppage.

Nino TKO14

 

You talking about Hagler here. :good

It seems you're talking about Marv again. :yep